Method for controlling mechanisms and technical systems a corresponding device and control software

ABSTRACT

The invention relates to a method for the control of mechanisms and technical systems characterized by that  
     a) the mechanisms or technical systems to be controlled in their elementary functions ( 8 ) with their states defined according to the instructions and the appropriate signal representations of the sensors ( 13 ) and actuators ( 12 ) are stored in a control, whereby starting from a reference state ( 18 ) at the start of the control activation a continuous comparison is made of the actual states transmitted by the technical device through the sensors ( 13 ) with the desired states ( 24 ) stored in the control for all elementary functions and therefore any deviation in the system to be controlled from the desired state ( 24 ) according to the instructions is detected,  
     b) a new instruction that changes the state of the mechanisms or the technical system updates when started the desired state ( 24 ) for making the comparison and monitors the time period until signalization of the new state defined by that instruction on the base of also stored permissible transition times,  
     c) whereby sensor signals and comparable information exclusively serve for the identification of the state of elementary functions ( 8 ), state changes take place exclusively through the start of elementary instructions ( 16 ) to which the sensor and actuator signals as desired state are assigned, and that the application instructions ( 32 ) freely defined on a logical-functional language level are defined by appropriate assignment of elementary instructions ( 16 ).  
     A device for carrying out the method and a method to produce the control software are described.

[0001] The invention refers to a method for the control of mechanisms and technical systems, as well as to the devices of an electronic control to be designed for that and a method for the creation of the control software.

[0002] From DE 44 07 334 A1 a method is known for the creation and representation of controls by that controls can be easily graphically designed. The desired function of the control is graphically entered into a computer as an event-driven network of symbols with freely choosable connections, or is represented by a computer. The network transformed into a machine readable form can be used by the computer or a separate control computer as control programme. The method is suitable for programmable logic controllers and DDC-systems.

[0003] From DE 195 13 801 A1 a method is known for the automatic generation of a control for a process in that a non-deterministic automaton is determined that describes all physically possible behaviours of the control, in which the permissible state transitions of the process to be influenced by the control are described, in which the automaton is set such that it fulfils given safety requirements, in which the automaton is set such that it fulfils the function of the system consisting of the control and the process. The method uses the programming language CSLxt to describe the components of the system specification. For the specification of the process model, not the state transitions are described in detail, but so-called predefined qualitative constraints are used that serve to automatically generate the control.

[0004] It is disadvantageous that the description of state transitions can be faulty on a higher language level and a later correction of the control cannot be made easily.

[0005] Furthermore,

[0006] programmable logic controllers (PLCs)

[0007] hardware PLCs

[0008] software PLCs

[0009] programming systems and programming languages

[0010] Simatic S7

[0011] programming to the IEC 1131-3 standard

[0012] standard programming languages: ladder diagram, logic diagram, selection logic, Structured Text are known.

[0013] It is disadvantageous in the state-of-the-art that using Boolean algebra, in principle, conditions resulting from inputs (sensors) are formulated to set outputs (actuators) that are continuously recalculated cyclically. This programming approach has developed historically. Evidence of this state is produced by the fact that according to the generally accepted standard, the “ladder diagram” can still be used as a programming language.

[0014] For all the CAE support by graphic surfaces and high-level languages, basic imperfections have remained such as confusingness of the programme and its individual character moulded by the programmer, never complete testability of the programme concerning its functionality, because the result of the cyclic calculations can be influenced by combinatory and time-dependent accidents, and the difficult design of sophisticated error reactions.

[0015] It is the objective of the invention to describe a control for mechanisms or technical systems that solves the control problem without use of conditions of Boolean algebra whereby a clearly arranged programme free of individual mouldings and completely testable is to be created.

[0016] According to the invention, the problem is solved by a method with the features mentioned in claim 1. Further, the problem is solved by a method for the generation of a control software with the features mentioned in claim 11 and by an equipment with the features mentioned in claim 16.

[0017] Appropriate subclaims present other useful embodiments and developments of the invention.

[0018] The essence of the invention is that derived from the functionality of the mechanism or technical system to be controlled, particularly with its development, using technical means the functionality of the device to be controlled is filed, managed and updated in a control computer, which is designed to be a control, as a complete representation of the desired state of the system according to the instructions and a comparison of that desired state with the actual state of the technical device is made via the sensor signals transmitted. This desired/actual state comparison is continuously made for all sensor signals of the system to be controlled. If there are deviations of the actual state from the desired state, prepared algorithms are processed and prepared useful decisions are activated. Thus, each sensor signal is compared with exactly one desired signal and this comparison is solely made to identify the state of the technical system. Changes in state are effected exclusively through instructions on a functional language level. These instructions are managed in a special domain of the control; when an instruction is started, the desired state in the representation is updated and the change of the actual state of the technical system that fulfils the instruction is checked after a predetermined time.

[0019] The devices to be controlled are stored in the control in form of their elementary functions with the states of these elementary functions defined according to the instructions and the appropriate signal representations of the sensors and actuators, whereby starting from a defined reference state at the beginning of the activation of the control for all elementary functions a continuous comparison of the actual states signalized by the technical system through the sensors with the desired state stored in the control is made so that each deviation in the system to be controlled from the desired state according to the instructions is detected, whereby a new instruction that changes the state of the technical system updates when started the desired state for making the comparison and supervises the time period until the new state defined by that instruction is signalized on the base of also stored permissible transition times, whereby sensor signals and comparable information exclusively serve for the identification of the state and state changes take place exclusively through the start of instructions that are freely defined for that to occur on a logical-functional language level and to which the elementary instructions defined by sensor and actuator signals are assigned.

[0020] Advantageously the states of all elementary functions are managed as actual desired states with the appropriate actuators and sensors in a programme module referred to as EF-controler, and thus each change in state of the technical system that is detected by the sensors is evaluated for its equivalence to the desired state managed in the control.

[0021] A state of an elementary function of the signal representation which describes the state that is not equivalent to the desired state is advantageously transmitted to a programme module referred to as “not-desired state evaluator”, in which for selected states of elementary functions reaction instructions are stored that are started on equivalence to the state transmitted for check, whereby in all cases specific error messages are created.

[0022] To an instruction as a set of instructions, the new desired states of the sensors and actuators, the times of transition until the new desired state and the reaction instructions for selected state messages to be started in case of deviations, in each case classified as reaction instructions to be set and deleted before the start and after the execution, respectively, are assigned, whereby advantageously a programme module referred to as “instruction editor” undertakes the organization required for that in the system, and in this programme module also the release of a subsequent instruction in case of instruction sequences after signalling of the execution of the preceeding instruction and the organization of parallel instructions by temporary starting of parallel execution sequences according to the demand is realized.

[0023] Advantageously, in the organized control system sensor signals and other information to be controlled are integrated into a continuous data word in a programme module here referred to as “state monitor”, whereby the address of the appropriate elementary function in the EF-controler maintains assigned to the signals and for executing the comparison, each desired signal is faced by the actual signal in equal structure so that a desired signal/actual signal comparison is made possible that can be carried out very effectively by a programme, whereby any deviation of a signal after transmission for evaluation is entered as the new comparison state so that the comparison is always made to the state evaluated last, and each change in state is evaluated only once, whereby the comparison of the desired and actual signals is made directionally and after an interruption for the evaluation of a deviation the comparison is continued at the signal succeeding the interruption place, which ensures that each state change that is sufficiently long in time can be detected and evaluated.

[0024] In a control system organized in this way each recorded state change is recorded by the programme module state monitor in an event-time protocol and stored there, whereby in the simplest way process parameters defined thereby become accessible so that also, e.g., signal vibrations can be detected and, if necessary, filtered out.

[0025] Advantageously, the programme modules that are subject to real-time processing requirements—instruction editor, EF-controler, state monitor and not-desired state evaluator-are combined to a functional unit that is referred to as “execution computer”, for which a special processor is used, while the instructions formulated only on the logical-functional language level of the actual application programmes are organized in a second functional unit referred to as “instruction computer”, which is not subject to real-time processing requirements, whereby in case of a bigger and more variable instruction volume the instruction computer usefully has an own processor and here also the communication can be designed to be comfortable.

[0026] Instructions transmitted from the instruction computer to the execution computer are advantageously executed without being checked, whereby the execution computer carries out each action autonomously. Therefore, in the instruction computer blocking lists are managed on the logical-functional instruction level for the mutually exclusive states, which take on that proportion of blockings that is determined on the process and machine sides, whereby here in the instruction computer an application process instruction, in addition to the information which instructions have to be transmitted to the execution computer, also defines for which other application instructions blockings are to be set or deleted during or after the execution.

[0027] The execution computer can execute a received instruction autonomously, whereby the instruction computer makes the checked subsequent instruction available to the execution computer in an instruction buffer as intermediate storage and after that updates the state in the instruction computer to the condition that will be after the execution of this instruction made available and the subsequent instruction is checked in the instruction computer already during the execution of the preceeding instruction in the execution computer so that as a rule a faster programme run can be achieved. Non-compatible instructions are identified and marked as not permissible already in the instruction computer and such an instruction is not started. If the prepared instruction is permissible, the state expected for the check of the instruction in the instruction computer will appear, error-free execution provided, and programme running is continued while in case of an error, a reset is carried out to the state with regard to the current instruction as error state.

[0028] When producing a control programme the user of this control is advantageously supported by a dialogue with a development programme, whereby the first description of the system to be controlled demands information on the hierarchical functional structure of the system, the lower end of this structure, in each case, is regarded as elementary function and each elementary function has to be defined in its instruction states also within a dialogue, and the sensor signals, actuators, control times for the transition between the states according to the instructions and a reference state for the start has to be assigned, the definition of the integration of more complex partial systems can also take place, whereby the user of the control system provides only the above primary data and the control development programme therefrom generates the system elementary function memory, the EF-controller and the signal vector for the state monitor, and thus the technical system can already be put into operation, checked for error-free signal definition in the reference state, controlled with the defined elementary functions and be tested and checked as far as permissible with regard to single instructions.

[0029] For such a dialogue-supported system the application instructions are advantageously produced in such a way that in an instruction library elementary functions from the previously defined elementary functions are assigned to the near-to-process application instructions as single instructions, parallel or serial instruction sequences, in addition, the blocking conditions on the instruction level in the instruction computer and, for the instruction set to be transmitted to the execution computer also the reaction instructions for selected deviations combined with suitable error messages, which have to be entered into the not-desired state evaluator, are defined.

[0030] For a control system with that structure changes of the elementary functions maintain locally limited. Any time, also with calculable local effect, new application instructions, blocking conditions or error reactions can be entered, extended or changed, or without any reaction to already defined programmes, specified by the allocation of state data for the system, new assignments of instructions and instruction conditions can be carried out.

[0031] The logical-functional structure of each programme produced in this way can be completely checked. Important additional process information is accessible through the event-time protocol; an unambiguous cause is diagnosed for each malfunction without any additional measures, the state of the system can be completely indicated at any point in time in a defined manner, a copy with the same capability to describe the system to be controlled can be maintained in an external control computer that has been connected into a network with the system, the elementary functions and the defined instructions can serve as a direct functional base for the visualization of the systems and processes to be controlled, and the communication of the control programme with other intelligent programme modules, such as simulations for process optimization, can easily be organized.

[0032] For small-scale controls with a limited instruction volume the modules of the execution computer and of the instruction computer can based on a principally equal structure and function of the control be enclosed in a control hardware module with fixed instruction sets, which are activated with simple operating elements whereby an external computer can be coupled over a suitable interface so that the read-in of the control software and if necessary, also a comfortable communication and diagnosis can be realized and hence comparable control characteristics and comfort at a reasonable price can be achieved.

[0033] The solution according to the invention avoids the imperfections of the state-of-the-art by a programming approach that is unusual up to now, which makes use of the designed, hence impressed functionality of the system. New means completely substitute the signal interconnection using Boolean algebra in condition equations to set outputs.

[0034] In the following, the invention is further explained by examples of embodiment. In the drawings it is shown by

[0035]FIG. 1a representation of a basic classification of the functional ranges in the structure of the control

[0036]FIG. 2a hierarchically classified functional structure of a technical system

[0037]FIG. 3 information to be defined for the elementary functions on the basis of a general example

[0038]FIG. 4a simple technical system in a schematic representation

[0039]FIG. 5a functional structure according to FIG. 4

[0040]FIG. 6a definition of the elementary functions according to FIG. 4

[0041]FIG. 7a representation of input and structure of a data frame to realize the control

[0042]FIG. 8a structure of an execution computer

[0043]FIG. 9a content of an instruction as instruction set for the instruction buffer

[0044]FIG. 10a representation of the function of an instruction starter

[0045]FIG. 11a representation of the function of an EF-controler

[0046]FIG. 12a representation of the function of a not-desired state evaluator

[0047]FIG. 13a representation of the function of a state monitor

[0048]FIG. 14a structure of an event-time protocol

[0049]FIG. 15 an example of a formation basis for formal instruction names

[0050]FIG. 16 an example of the definition of application instructions

[0051]FIG. 17 an example of a blocking list managed in a control

[0052]FIG. 18 an example of the determination of error instructions

[0053]FIG. 19 an example of a control with more complex functions

[0054]FIG. 20a structure and name definition according to FIG. 19

[0055]FIG. 21 all data for an instruction library of an instruction computer according to FIGS. 19 and 20

[0056]FIG. 22 features of an embodiment as small-scale control

[0057]FIG. 1 shows the basic classification of the functional ranges in the structure 1 of the new control. The time-critical functions of the desired signal/actual signal comparison, reactions to deviations of the actual compared to the desired state and the activation of state-changing actuators according to instructions are assigned to the execution computer 2. Instructions received from the instruction computer 3 are processed by the execution computer 2 without check, whereby the execution of an instruction and the reaction to deviations of the actual compared to the desired state are realized autonomously by the execution computer 2. It is useful, or even compulsory to reach shortest reaction times of the control in more complex systems, to allocate to the execution computer 2 a hardware of its own with an own processor.

[0058] In the instruction computer 3 all control operations are managed on a logical-functional level. Here from device-related elementary instructions near-to-process application instructions are defined, filed and activated as single instructions, parallel or serial instruction sequences. Here on the logical instruction level also the management of the blockings for mutually exclusive States as alternatives to former locks and condition formulations over Boolean signal interconnections is carried out.

[0059] In this control concept all jobs that are not assigned to the execution or instruction computers are assigned to the application computer 4. This above all is the case of problems close to the process such as in the workpiece programme range of a CNC-control.

[0060] This control can be configurated to be appropriate for problems of different size and complexity, whereby equal principle apply of all configurations in the development system. In case of a very small number of instructions, the share of the instruction computer 3 can be assigned to the execution computer 2 as a software zone. Execution and instruction computers with own processors would be used for typical PLC problems of today with the system operated via operating and signalling elements as well as the monitor. Further, it is possible in all embodiments to couple a comfortable communication system, e.g. a transportable computer, over a simply designed interface for programming and commissioning or, in case of malfunction, diagnosis purposes.

[0061]FIG. 2 shows as an example the hierarchical functional structure 5 of a technical system. It is based on the development methodology that specific of each technical system, such a system structure can be built from the functional unit of the total system 6 over different functional units of the subsystems 7 up to the functional units elementary functions 8. In terms of the new control the final branches of this tree structure are elementary functions characterized in that these functional units can have different states and cannot be further divided usefully, the functional states of which being of interest on the control side are no longer representative of combined states of other elementary functional groups to be controlled, as it is characteristic of higher-order non-elementary functional units 6 and 7 in the structure. Here the position within the system to be controlled is decisive so that an intelligent system integrated through few elementary instructions is also classified as elementary function.

[0062]FIG. 3 describes using a general example the information to be defined for elementary functions on a “data sheet on elementary functions” 9. In 10 the name of the elementary function is defined that identifies this elementary function. Usefully a functional diagram 11 shows the features of the states of the elementary functions with the allocation of actuators 12 and sensors 13. In the marked areas of the state definitions 14 the information necessary for the control is systematized and defined. The state definitions 14 indicate the states that can be taken by the elementary function, and the definition of the state-assigned signal vectors 15 for the actuators 12 and sensors 13. Also here, the instructions 16 are defined that initiate the transition to a certain state. A control time 17 is predetermined for each of these transitions, which as a rule can be a multiple of the probable functional time and is only used to detect execution errors if the ordered state was not reached. By the marking, one of the possible states is defined as the reference state 18

[0063]FIG. 4 represents a simple technical system for that in FIG. 5 the function structure and in FIG. 6 the definition of the elementary instructions is shown.

[0064] The hierarchic function structure described here and the definition of the appropriate elementary functions are, in their nature, primary development contents that can be documented already in a relatively early phase of the product development with only little additional effort.

[0065]FIG. 7 shows input and structure of the data frame when the new control is used. The editing level 19 includes both main components hierarchic function structure 5 and the data sheet of the elementary functions 9. Each functional unit elementary function 8 in the structure must be described by an appropriate data sheet on elementary functions 9. Completeness of the data and their formal correctness is automatically checked on the editing level. If there is a positive result of the check and if the user affirms the end of the system description, the input is closed and the data basis of the control for the described system is generated. As the first step, the elementary function memory 20 is generated. This elementary function memory 21 contains all elementary instructions of the system, all system states and the information defined for them, as described in FIG. 3. The formal name of the elementary functions are derived from the structure so that elementary functions get unmistakable names even if equal data sheets are used. On the second step, the EF-controler 22 is generated. For this, in the EF-controler 23 the reference state of the system is generated from the defined reference states 18 of all elementary functions. For the actual state of the elementary functions also managed here, the data structure for the storage of the actual state of the elementary functions 25 is established by doubling the data structure of the desired state of the elementary functions 24. Already here, when operating the control, a comparison could be made between the desired and the actual states of the sensors of the elementary functions. Greater effectivity, however, is achieved by the third step referred to as 26 for the generation of the state monitor 27 (also described in greater detail further down). In this step, from the desired signal vectors of the elementary functions 28 and simultaneously from the actual signal vectors of the elementary functions 29 the desired signal vector of the system 30 and the actual signal vector of the system 31 are formed. Each sensor in the system signal vector maintains the address of its origin assigned to it as the name of the elementary function 10 in the EF-controler 23.

[0066]FIG. 8 shows the structure of the execution computer 2 and its interaction with the instruction computer 3. The execution computer 2 receives an application instruction to be executed 32 from the instruction computer 3. This instruction is decoded in a module instruction editor 33. In this process application instructions are transformed into their appropriate elementary instructions and from the elementary function memory 21 the complete information content of the instruction set is given to these elementary instructions. This instruction set is entered into the instruction buffer 34 of the execution computer. After acknowledgment of the termination of the previous instruction, the module instruction starter 35 starts processing of the instruction waiting in the instruction buffer 34 and carries out all activities involved. This concerns actualisation in the module EF-controler 36, in the module state monitor 37, and in the module not-desired state evaluator 38. The module instruction starter 35 enters the new desired state of the sensors for the concerned elementary function into the module EF-controler 36 and by setting the outputs according to the instruction, starts the appropriate actuator instruction. Also started is the control time 17 assigned to the execution of the instruction. In the not-desired state storage 39 the components of the instruction set “Not-desired instructions and messages” are entered.

[0067] After execution of the start activities by the instruction starter 35, the module state monitor 37 again takes on the comparison of the desired signal vector of the system 30 with the actual signal vector of the system 31. If this comparison detects a deviation between desired and actual signals, in the EF-controler 36 the actual state of the deviating signal in the actual signal vector of the elementary function 29 is updated. In the EF-controler 36 the deviation is evaluated (described in greater detail in FIG. 11), either (a) without any other reaction as the state detected through the running time element “changing” and hence return of the activities to the module state monitor 37, (b) through the detection of an executed instruction for equivalence of desired signal vector of the elementary function 28 and actual signal vector of the elementary function 29 in the EF-controler 36 and hence call of the module instruction starter 35, or—if neither evaluation applies—c) transmission of the actual signal vector of the elementary function 29 to the module not-desired state evaluator 38. There this actual signal vector 29 is compared with the signal vectors existing in the not-desired state action storage 39 and on equivalence the not-desired state instruction 40 that is assigned to this case is started over the module instruction starter 35. If there is no equivalence, return to the state monitor 37 takes place. In all cases, an appropriate message 41 is created. The range marked by 42 characterizes the time-critical activities.

[0068]FIG. 9 shows the content of an instruction 43, as it is entered as instruction set into the instruction buffer 34 of the execution computer 2. Line (1) contains the designation of the elementary function 10 ordered for change, lines (2) and (3) contain the new desired state of the sensors, or actuators, respectively, and hence the desired signal vector of the elementary function 28, line (4) prescribes the control time 17 in which the change of the state to the new condition has to be made, line (5) contains the data for the updating of the entries which apply after the start of the instruction in the not-desired state action storage 39 for reactions with not-desired state instructions 40, and line (6) contains the same for the updating after the instruction has been processed successfully. The data on the lines (1) to (4) are in this case directly equivalent to the definitions of the editing level 19 concerning the elementary functions 8. The lines (5) and (6) can contain, in addition, not-desired state instructions 40 from definitions of process-related data on the application instructions 32.

[0069]FIG. 10 describes the function of the module instruction starter 35 and the treatment of sequential instructions 44 as well as of parallel instructions 45. The instruction buffer 34 is always loaded by the instruction computer 3 with that instruction that follows the running instruction. Defined instruction sequences (=sequential instructions 44) are not different, in this case, from separately defined, mutually independent instructions.

[0070] Parallel instructions 45 are characterized in that they can be executed independently from each other with regard to function and time, and for a time-optimal process, do have to be executed in parallel. For any instruction defined as parallel, therefore, an instruction buffer of its own 46 at the interface between the instruction computer 3 and execution computer 2 is defined, from which parallel, mutually independent instruction sequences 45 can be processed. If after the execution of parallel instructions 45 there are no other parallel instructions, the opened storage areas are closed again so that only actually needed buffer memories 46 exist. FIG. 10 shows an example of three opened parallel instructions 45, from which the entered instructions 43 are started one after the other. If the check 47 shows that there is no other instruction is waiting in the buffer storage, then the appropriate parallel instruction buffer 46 is closed and the module state monitor 37 activated. For a positive check result 48 the instruction content 43 is appropriately updated and started. After the end of these operations the module EF-controler 36 is activated 49. After reaching the ordered state 50 the updatings defined therefore in the instruction set 43 are carried out by the instruction starter 35 and then the next instruction determined and started.

[0071]FIG. 11 indicates the function of the module EF-controler 36. The start 51 of an activity of the EF-controler is always activated by an actual change. This is either a new desired signal vector of an elementary function 28, which is entered by the module instruction starter 35 in a new instruction, or an updating 53 of the current actual state made by the module state monitor. The first check 54 compares the desired state to the actual state. In case of equivalence it is checked whether the change status 55 was set. If this is true 56, a running instruction ended, otherwise 57 the ordered state was regained after a faulty deviation. In either case an appropriate message is created and the module instruction starter 35 is started 58.—If the desired and actual states do not agree, branch 59 is processed. Again the change status is checked 60. If the change status for this elementary function is before 61, the message “EF changing” 62 is created and the module state monitor 37 started. If there is no change status 63, the name and the current not-desired state actual signal vector 64 of the elementary function are entered into the evaluation memory of the not-desired state evaluator 65 and the not-desired state evaluator 38 started.

[0072]FIG. 12 shows the function of the not-desired state evaluator 38. The start 66 of the not-desired state evaluator is activated by the EF-controler 36 after transmission of a not-desired state signal vector 64. In the first step it is checked, whether there are entries under the name of the elementary function 10 in the not-desired state action storage 39. (As it has already been mentioned in FIG. 10, these entries are updated by the instruction starter 35 as information components of an instruction 43.) If there are no definitions for the elementary function in the not-desired state action storage 39, 67, only an error message 67 a bearing the designation of the elementary function and the not-desired state actual signal vector 64 with the faulty signal marked is transmitted to the higher-order control level—the instruction computer 3—for evaluation. Then the module state monitor 37 is re-started.

[0073] If in the not-desired state action storage 39, there is a not-desired state signal vector for the elementary function 68, the not-desired state actual signal vector 64 is, as the next step, compared for equivalence with the stored signal vector 69. If there is no equivalence 70, again only a concrete error message 67 is created and the state monitor 37 started.—If, however, there is an equivalence of the signal vector with entries in the action storage 71, the reaction instructions 72 defined for this case are transmitted to the instruction starter 35 to be immediately executed. In parallel to that, it is checked for the message to be created 73, whether there is an event control 74. In case of an event control 74, the system moves in the normal functional frame, an event which has been detected activates an appropriate action (e.g., switch-off of a pump when the upper level has been reached). In this case, the appropriate message 75 clearly distinguishes the event instruction of the elementary function 76 from error states. If it is not an event control 77, an appropriate error message 78 is created.

[0074]FIG. 13 shows the function and features of the module state monitor 37. If no other activities of the module run, the state monitor starts continuously the comparison 80 of the desired signal vector 30 and the actual signal vector 31 of the system. This comparison always includes the whole system signal vector and is continuously repated 81 when there is equivalence of the compared states. When a deviation is detected, first, it is checked whether the system left the waiting state und is to execute a new instruction. If this is true 82, then the module instruction starter 35 is started. If it is not true, the deviating actual signal is entered into the actual signal vector of this elementary function in the EF-controler 83 and is-as it has been explained for FIG. 11—evaluated there. A deviation can develop either by the presetting of a new desired state on the start of a new instruction and entry into the desired signal vector 30 of the system by the EF-controler 36, or in the other case, by a changed sensor signal in the actual signal vector 31 of the system. After entry of the deviating actual signal into the concerned elementary function in the EF-controler, this signalled actual state is entered as the new comparison state into the desired state comparison vector 84. This ensures that each change is evaluated only once. Therefore, the desired comparison state of the system signal vector is defined as the comparison with “the last evaluated state” of the system 84. This makes it possible and useful to enter the detected event into an event-time protocol 85 that is described in detail in FIG. 14. After the mentioned actions of the state monitor 37, this state monitor starts the module EF-controler 36. After evaluation, again-as within the functioning of the EF-controler, or instruction starter, respectively-the module state monitor is activated. It continues the desired/actual state comparison in the system signal vector at that signal that follows the last not equivalent signal. This ensures that all signals of the system signal vector are compared one after the other and a vibrating signal cannot cause an infinite loop to run. Such a phenomenon could be imagined at another start of the comparison at the signal just evaluated, if this signal would change its state with the pulse of the signal transfer time.

[0075]FIG. 14 is intended to illustrate the design of an event-time protocol 85 in form of a list. The first column includes the name of the elementary function concerned by the event, column 2 the signal concerned by the change, column 3 the changed signal state. These data are copies of the information that the state monitor transmits to the EF-controler. If the actual system time is entered in column 4, a process protocol is produced that can be used in many cases. In this example, it is marked by the first and last entries that the elementary function A11 with the signal E1 has again reached the first state. The times assigned to the events could be used if demanded as a precise measure of such a period. This protocol makes it also possible to detect signal vibrations and activate filter if needed, that can reduce, for example, the scanning frequency for the vibrating signal. Dependent on the process and importance of the information as well as the available storage, longer periods of time can be recorded and stored, which can be used for the diagnosis of long-time changes, or based on a fixed storage volume only the last, in each case, period can be available for, e.g., the evaluation of a breakdown.

[0076]FIG. 15 shows for the example of FIGS. 4 to 6, the basis of formation of the formal instruction names 86, which are derived from the function structure 5 and can be used for an unambiguous designation of the elementary functions in application instructions.

[0077] In FIG. 16, the definition of application instructions and the determination of instruction blockings 88 for the application instructions is shown for the example of FIGS. 4 to 6.

[0078]FIG. 17 shows, as an example, the blocking list 89 of the system Locking device managed in the control, and is intended to illustrate the dynamic action of the blocking conditions determined in FIG. 16. As to FIG. 17, it has to be emphasized that it is an auxiliary representation and there is no such table in the control. Only a storage area exists, in which at different points of time (shown here by t1 to t8) different conditions are entered by the instructions that have been effective up to these points of time.

[0079] In column 1 all instructions of the system are listed. If an activated application instruction contains a blocking condition for another instruction, the causing instruction is entered as blocking condition in the other instruction. In this example, with its activation at time t7, the instruction EF2-B2 (locking) blocks the instruction EF1-B1 (Open door mover). As it has been determined, the locking bar should only be put in, if the door is closed-therefore the entry of the blocking at EF2-B2 with ordering the instruction “(Open the door) EF1-B1” at time t3.

[0080] It is essential for the function of the control that after the transmission of an application instruction 32 to the instruction computer 34 of the execution computer 2—which instruction the execution computer can execute autonomously as mentioned-the instruction computer 3 updates its state as it will be after correct execution of this instruction. For this state the permissibility of the next instruction is checked even during the execution of the previous instruction and this instruction released, if appropriate. In the example, during the execution “Unlocking the bar” at t1 the instruction “Open the door” is in the instruction buffer, which will be started at the time point t3 and will then simultaneously activate the check of the instruction “Close the door” for the time point t5 under the conditions of the time point t4.

[0081] This allows in a time-optimal way that with the termination of an instruction the subsequent already checked instruction can start or, respectively, it is detected even during the execution of an instruction that the prepared next instruction is not permissible for the system state coming. If there is an error in the instruction running in the execution computer, the instruction computer is reset updated to the error state.

[0082]FIG. 18 (on page 12) is thought to present an example for the determination of error instructions. Assume as critical that on closing—for any reason—the door meets an inserted bar. FIG. 18 shows the formulation of an instruction error as component of the instruction set “Close door mover”. From the state of the elementary function Bar lock E1=1, “Bar not free” is concluded and as the error reaction in the not-desired state evaluator, the process “Close door” is transformed into “Open the door”.

[0083] Analyses show that as a rule, only few error instructions are required at a certain time point. On principle it is possible to react to any event by each instruction.

[0084]FIG. 19 is thought to be another example for the potential of the control for the solution of more complex problems and different application requirements of a plant. For those different application requirements and the instruction and blocking conditions resulting therefrom the term “status” 90 will be used.

[0085] It is assumed that two door devices be controlled either of which are equal to the example discussed so far. A device switch for each demanded operational status is added: in state S1 the doors can be independently of each other, in S2 both doors are synchronously opened or closed, respectively, and in S3, operated as a lock chamber, always one of the doors maintains closed.

[0086]FIG. 20 shows the structure and the name definitions as they are designed by the control using the data given on the editing level 19.

[0087]FIG. 21 indicates all data for the instruction library 92 of the instruction computer necessary to solve the problem. The determinations established for the closing device of one door are doubled for the direct door control of a copy on the generation under the new system name. All determinations on the control status of both doors are realised over new stats instruction sheets 91 that are selected over the status switch. For the status S3 instruction sheet, no elementary function was used but, by “Door x”, a higher-order hierarchical level in the function structure. Thus, very effectively, whole function areas can be blocked against state changes or selected by formulations such as “All except XXX”.

[0088]FIG. 22 shows features of a small-scale control 94 in a technical device 95. The relatively small and fixed instruction volume of the small-scale control 95 is arranged in a control hardware module that includes the functionalities of the execution computer 2 and the instruction computer 3. Operation is by the usual switch and indication devices 96. Over an interface 97, the computer 98 can be coupled so that all the functionality of the control for entering the control software and comfortable communication and diagnosis are possible.

[0089] Nomenclature

[0090]1. Structure of the control ASS

[0091]2. Execution computer

[0092]3. Instruction computer

[0093]4. Application computer

[0094]5. Function structure

[0095]6. Functional unit Total system

[0096]7. Functional unit Subsystem

[0097]8. Functional unit Elementary function

[0098]9. Data sheet for elementary functions

[0099]10. Name of the elementary function

[0100]11. Function diagram

[0101]12. Actuators

[0102]13. Sensors

[0103]14. State definitions

[0104]15. Signal vectors

[0105]16. Elementary instructions

[0106]17. Control time

[0107]18. Reference state

[0108]19. Editing level

[0109]20. Generation of the elementary function memory

[0110]21. Elementary function memory

[0111]22. Generation of the EF-controler

[0112]23. EF-controler

[0113]24. Desired state of the elementary functions

[0114]25. Actual state of the elementary functions

[0115]26. Generation of the state monitor

[0116]27. State monitor

[0117]28. Desired signal vector of the elementary function

[0118]29. Actual signal vector of the elementary function

[0119]30. Desired signal vector of the system

[0120]31. Actual signal vector of the system

[0121]32. Application instruction

[0122]33. Instruction editor

[0123]34. Instruction buffer

[0124]35. Module instruction starter

[0125]36. Module EF-controler

[0126]37. Module state monitor

[0127]38. Module not-desired state evaluator

[0128]39. Not-desired state action memory

[0129]40. Not-desired state instruction

[0130]41. State message

[0131]42. Time-critical functional region

[0132]43. Content of an instruction

[0133]44. Sequential instructions

[0134]45. Parallel instructions

[0135]46. Instruction buffer for parallel instructions

[0136]47. Check result instruction buffer “No”

[0137]48. Check result instruction buffer “Yes”

[0138]49. Activation of the EF-controler

[0139]50. Activities instruction starter when “ordered state” is reached

[0140]51. Activity start EF-controler

[0141]52. Change of the desired state in the EF-controler due to instruction

[0142]53. Change of the actual state in the EF-controler due to sensor message

[0143]54. Comparison of desired and actual states in the EF-controler

[0144]55. Change status in the EF-controler

[0145]56. Alternative “Change status”

[0146]57. Alternative “No change status”

[0147]58. Activation of the instruction starter by the EF-controler

[0148]59. Alternatives for non-equivalence of the desired and actual states in the EF-controler

[0149]60. Check for change status non-equivalence of the desired and acutal states in the EF-controler

[0150]61. Activity for change status and non-equivalence of the desired and acutal states in the EF-controler

[0151]62. Message from the EF-controler “Elementary function (name of elementary function) changing”

[0152]63. Alternative in the EF-controler for actual state not equal to desired state and no change status

[0153]64. Not-desired state actual signal vector

[0154]65. Evaluation storage not-desired state evaluator

[0155]66. Start of not-desired state evaluator

[0156]67. Action when not-desired state elementary function has no entry in the not-desired state action storage

[0157]67 a. Error message on not-desired state elementary functions

[0158]68. Action when not-desired state elementary function has an entry in the not-desired state action storage

[0159]69. Comparison of the not-desired state signal vector with the not-desired state signal vector stored in the not-desired state evaluator

[0160]70. Action for non-equivalence not-desired state actual signal vector with not-desired state signal vector in the not-desired state evaluator

[0161]71. Action for equivalence not-desired state actual signal vector with not-desired state signal vector in the not-desired state evaluator

[0162]72. Reaction instructions in the not-desired state action memory

[0163]73. Check whether not-desired state actual signal vector belongs to an event control

[0164]74. Event control

[0165]75. Message event control

[0166]76. Content of the message event control

[0167]77. Error message if no event control

[0168]78. Content of the error message

[0169]79. Start of the module state monitor

[0170]80. Comparison of the desired signal vector of the system with the actual signal vector of the system

[0171]81. Programme loop for the comparison of the desired signal vector of the system with the actual signal vector of the system

[0172]82. Transmission of the activity from state monitor to instruction starter

[0173]83. Entry of changes actual sensor signal from state monitor in the EF-controler

[0174]84. Comparison desired vector “last evaluated state” in the state monitor

[0175]85. Event-time protocol

[0176]86. Formal instruction names

[0177]87. Instruction blockings

[0178]88. Blocking list in the instruction computer

[0179]89. Blocking list of th example Locking device

[0180]90. Status of a device

[0181]91. Status instruction sheets

[0182]92. Instruction library

[0183]93. Application programme

[0184]94. Small-scale control

[0185]95. Technical device with small-scale control

[0186]96. Switching and indicating devices

[0187]97. Interface for computer connection

[0188]98. Transportable computer 

1. Method for the control of mechanisms or technical systems characterized in that a) the mechanisms or technical systems to be controlled are stored in the control by way of their elementary functions (8) with the states thereof defined according to the instructions and the appropriate signal vectors (15) of the sensors (13) and actuators (12), whereby starting from a defined reference state (18) at the beginning of the control activation a continuous comparison is made of the actual states transmitted of the technical equipment by the sensors (13) with the desired states (24) stored in the control for all elementary functions and hence any deviation in the system to be controlled from the desired state (24) according to the instructions is detected, b) a new elementary instruction (16) that changes the state of the mechanisms or the technical system with its start updates the desired state (24) for the comparison and monitors the time period until the acknowledgment of the new state according to the instruction, based on also stored permissible control time periods (17), c) whereby sensor signals and comparable information serve exclusively to identify states of elementary functions (8), state changes exclusively occur through the start of elementary instructions (16), to which the sensor and actuator signals are assigned as desired state and the application instructions (32) freely defined on logical-functional language level are defined by the appropriate assignment of elementary instructions (16).
 2. Method to claim 1 characterized in that a) in the control in a special programme module here referred to as EF-controler (23), the states of all elementary functions (8) are managed as ordered actual desired states (24) and as current actual states (25) with the appropriate actuators (12) and sensors (13), b) whereby any change in the state of the technical system detected through the sensors (13) is therefore assigned to the concerned elementary function (8) as current actual state and can be compared with the desired state (24) managed in the control and evaluated.
 3. Method to claims 1 or 2 characterized in that a) for a detected actual state (25) of an elementary function (8) that is not equivalent to the desired state (24), the signal vector (15) that describes the actual state is handed over to another special programme module of the control, here referred to as not-desired state evaluator (38), b) whereby in this not-desired state evaluator (38) reaction instructions (72) are stored for selected states of elementary functions (8) that are started on equivalence with the state that was handed over for check, c) and in all cases, special error messages are produced that indicate the name of the elementary function concerned and the deviating signal.
 4. Method to claims 1 to 3 characterized in that a) to an application instruction (32), as an instruction set the new desired states (24) of the sensors (13) and actuators (12), die control times (17) for the new desired state (24) as well as the reaction instructions (72) to be started in case of deviations are assigned classified, in each case, as reaction instructions (72) for selected state messages, to be deleted and set prior to the start and after the execution, respectively, b) whereby another special programme module of the control, here referred to as instruction starter (35), takes on the required organization in the system, and thus also the release of a next instruction in case of instruction sequences after the execution message of the previous instruction as well as the organization of parallel instructions (45) by temporary opening, as necessary, of parallel execution sequences are realized.
 5. Method to claims 1 to 4 characterized in that a) in another programme module here referred to as state monitor (37), sensor signals (13) and other information to be controlled are integrated into a continuous data word, whereby the address of the appropriate elementary function (8) in the EF-controler (36) of the control maintains assigned to the signals, b) for the comparison, each desired signal (30) is faced by the actual signal (31) of the sensor message in equal structure, c) whereby for a detected deviation of an actual signal, the programme module state monitor (37) updates this actual signal in the EF-controler (36) as the new actual state of the elementary function (29), d) and after the updating and transmission for evaluation in the EF-controler (36) the changed signal is entered as the new comparison state in the state monitor (37) so that a comparison in the state monitor (37) is always made to the state evaluated last and hence each change in state is evaluated only once, e) whereby the comparison of the desired and actual signals (30, 31) in the state monitor (37) is made directionally and after an interruption for the evaluation of a deviation the comparison is continued at the signal succeeding the interruption place, which ensures that each state change that is sufficiently long in time can be detected and evaluated.
 6. Method to claims 1 to 5 characterized in that a) each recorded state change is entered by the programme module state monitor (37) in an event-time protocol (85) and can be stored there, b) whereby in the simplest way time-dependent process parameters become accessible so that also signal vibrations can be detected and, if necessary, filtered out.
 7. Method to claims 1 to 6 characterized in that a) the subdomain execution computer (2) with the programme modules instruction starter (35) EF-controler (36), not-desired state evaluator (38) and state monitor (37) after transmission of an elementary instruction (16) to the programme module instruction starter (35) in the control includes no check for permissibility, b) the execution of a received instruction is, in each case, autonomously realized by the programme modules assigned to the execution computer (2), c) in the subdomain instruction computer (3) of the control blocking lists (88) for the mutually exclusive states are managed on the logical-functional instruction level, which take on that proportion of functional blockings that is determined by the process and machine sides, d) whereby an application instruction (32), in addition to elementary functions (8) to be changed also contains the information, for which other instructions blockings are to be set or deleted in the blocking list (88) during or after the execution of this application instruction (32).
 8. Method to claims 1 to 7 characterized in that the execution computer (2) and the instruction computer (3) work de-coupled in time by one programme step, a) the executing part of the control, the execution computer (2), executes a received instruction autonomously, whereby an instruction-managing part of the control, the instruction computer (3), makes the checked next instruction available to the executing part execution computer (2) in an intermediate storage as instruction buffer (34), b) and after provision of an instruction in the instruction buffer (34) of the execution computer (2) the state in the instruction computer (3) is updated to the condition that will be after the execution of this instruction, and the check to this expected state of the then subsequent instruction for permissibility in the instruction computer (3) is made already during the execution of the preceeding instruction, c) if due to an error the expected state does not appear, the checked instruction from the instruction buffer (34) is reset and the system updated to error state.
 9. Method to claims 1 to 8 characterized in that application instructions (32) are prepared a) by assigning to the application instructions (32) to be functionally defined close to the process by language, from the previously defined elementary instructions (16), such elementary instructions single, parallel or as a sequence, b) by defining the blocking conditions on instruction level for the updatings to be made when activating the application instruction (32), in the blocking list in the instruction computer (88), c) by determining the reaction instructions (72) for selected deviations and suitable error messages, d) by filing this information in an instruction library (92), where the control calls the instruction contents for application instructions (32).
 10. Method to claims 1 to 9 characterized in that an application programme (93) for the operation of the technical system determines the sequence of defined application instructions (32) that are to be executed one after the other or in parallel.
 11. Method for the development of control software characterized in that the development of the control software is supported by a development system with dialogue ability, a) whereby for the description of the system to be controlled the data of the hierarchical function structure (5) is requested, b) each lower end of this structure is considered as elementary function (8) and each elementary function (8) is to be defined with their instruction states also in a dialogue, c) whereby to these defined elementary instructions (16), the signals of the sensors (13), of the actuators (12), the control times (17) for the transition between the states according to the instructions, and a reference state (18) are to be assigned, d) the integration of more complex partial systems can also be performed as elementary function (8), if the position in the function structure (5) indicates this, e) whereby the dialogue system requires only the primary data listed here on the structure (5) and elementary functions (9) as the basis for the description of the functionality of the technical system.
 12. Method to claims 11 characterized in that the dialogue-guided development system after entry of the primary data establishes and generates a) the system elementary instruction storage (21), b) the EF-controler (36) and c) the desired signal vector (30) and the actual signal vector for the state monitor (37) and thus the technical system can already be put into operation, checked for error-free signal definition in the reference state (18) and controlled with the defined elementary functions (16) in a state of putting into operation, and be tested and checked as far as permissible with regard to these single instructions.
 13. Method to claims 11 or 12 characterized in that changes of information on structure (5) and elementary functions (8) are only possible over the editing level (19) and the subsequent automatic generation ensures the consistency of the changed state.
 14. Method to claims 11 to 13 characterized in that the development system for the definition of application instructions (32) in specific dialogues a) offers the available elementary instructions (16) of the system for assignment, b) requests blocking conditions for the blocking list (88), whereby the data for blockings to be determined can be given graphically through selection in the function structure (5) and blocking determinations can be given as formulations such as “this elementary instruction”, “this elementary function”, “this branch of the function structure” or “all functions of this function branch except this elementary instruction”, c) determinations on specific reaction instructions (72) are requested for special errors, d) all determinations are stored and are classified and managed in the instruction library (92).
 15. Method to claims 11 to 14, characterized in a) that for a control system designed in such a manner changes of elementary functions (8) maintain locally limited, b) that any time, also with calculable local effect, new application instructions (32), blocking conditions in the blocking list (88) or error reactions by reaction instructions (72) can be entered, extended or changed, c) that differentiated by the assignment of status information (90), new definitions of application instructions (32) and instruction conditions can be made for the system without any reaction on already defined programmes
 16. Equipment for the control of mechanisms or technical systems characterized in a) that for the different problems different domains of the device are provided and these domains are configurated dependent on the most important features of the problems, whereby, particularly, short times of reaction to detected events and reliable programme runs are achieved, b) that the programme modules for all time-critical problems of the control, instruction starter (35), EF-controler (36), not-desired state evaluator (38) and state monitor (37) are arranged in a part of the device here referred to as execution computer (2), c) the execution computer (2), in case of voluminous programmes with great programme variability, has an own processor for these time-critical problems, d) that the execution computer (2) is autonomous for the communication with the devices to be controlled over the sensors (13), the activiation of actuators (12), the desired/actual state comparison, reactions to deviations of the actual (25) against the desired state (24) and the execution of a received instruction, e) for the management of application instructions (32) in instruction libraries (92), the management of blocking lists (88), the execution of application programmes (93) by step-by step transmission of instructions to the execution computer (2) and the external communication from the domain of the device here referred to as instruction computer (3), another processor is provided, if the features of c) are valid, f) for the problems of process design, unless they concern the execution or instruction computer, a domain application computer (4) is provided.
 17. Equipment to claim 16 characterized in that a) for small-scale controls (94) with a small instruction volume and uncritical time requirements the modules of the execution computer (2) and instruction computer (3) are included in a control hardware module (95) with fixed instruction sets. b) for the operation and communication usual switching and indication devices (96) are provided, c) over an interface (97) an external computer (98) for entering the control software and, if necessary, for a comfortable communication and diagnosis can be coupled. 